"When a country is indebted to the degree that were indebted, the country always defaults. We will default because the debt is unsustainable," Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) said on the House floor today.

"If we dont understand this, this default will not be because we don't send out the checks. We will send out the checks. It will be defaulted on because people will get their money back, or they will get their Social Security checks and it won't buy anything."

He would be right, the math does not add up, unless the Fed buys the debt and cancels it, this idea seems to be gaining traction.

Most think this would lead to hyperinflation, but I am starting to think they may be wrong because the economy is so weak there is no pressure on wages and companies can’t raise prices because of slack demand.

My question to my former fellow Paul cultists: Why does Ron Paul want to be President if he knows we are going to default? Also, it’s simply bogus to believe that while national debt service still makes around 10% of revenues. It’s definitely a dangerous situation if we go further along this road, but default will not be inevitable for at least several more years. More scaremongering from the Paul camp. Ironically, they accuse “neocons” (i.e., anyone who supports foreign intervention under any circumstance whatsoever) of scaremongering on radical Islamists.

Why doesn’t Ron Paul try to do something about it instead of whining? All he does is whine, then vote against bills, then say stupid stuff, and then repeat step one. It really gets old after a while. At least Rand came up with a budget proposal. Wasn’t radical enough for Ron Paul, apparently.

The only thing I trust Ron Paul with is to be the Chief Inquisitor of the Federal Reserve at this point. That’s what he’s good at.

The thing I like about Ron Paul is he is the only one of the 535 that really believes in smaller government. No other politician in Washington is willing to give up even a tiny earmark, so we will default. There is no doubt about that.

Ironic because Ron Paul was one of the three Republicans who refused to give up his earmarks last year.

Ron Paul is the one who isn’t serious. Jim DeMint, Ron Paul’s son Rand, Mike Lee, Michele Bachmann, and a host of others are looking for serious ways to reduce deficit spending and restore our Constitution, but all Ron Paul wants to do is advance his radical agenda. Now, I agree with a lot of Ron Paul’s agenda myself (not as a radical, but as an old school conservative), but I wouldn’t advance it at the expense of the American people. Ron Paul could be a voice at the table if he wanted to be, but no, he just wants to advance his agenda.

I’m voting for him. For the first time. What difference can it possibly make? What good are any of these other candidates? I believe the country is all but a lost cause, and voting at all is largely symbolic. I see zero national willpower for turning this boat around before it hits an iceberg. I see a country where the idea of small central government, along with traditional values is lost. I think it’s pretty much over.

The math does not add up for a reason. Obama has no inkling about money and finances, because those subjects involve math. Obama was always a Learning Disabled student. He has dyscalculia. 57 states? The wrong year on a guest book in England? One more week until his birthday? Obama was an affirmative action student because of his dyscalculia. That’s why all his school records are sealed. Obama is an affirmative action LD president. Don’t ever expect him to internalize or realize anything based on numbers. Our politicians in DC are doing us all a great disservice by pretending Obama could ever understand a budget. Not gonna happen, and they know it.

So vote for the man who doesn’t have the audacity to oppose the Leftist assault on traditional values and lies to SoCons in Iowa about it? That was one of the last straws for me. He writes a book and says we should tolerate all definitions of marriages, making silly arguments that if actually enacted would make a mockery of our courts in cases beyond marriage, and then has the audacity to tell Christians in Iowa that he is going to defend marriage. BS, Dr. Paul.

There are other current and potential candidates who have decent records that prove they can accomplish at least a portion of what they set out to achieve. All Ron Paul has are some decent floor speeches and he does a nice job as Chief Inquisitor of the Federal Reserve, even though he can’t get his audit bill passed despite having at one point enough cosponsors in the House to override a veto attempt.

If anyone is wondering why the Fed keeps printing and the govt keeps "borrowing" that money to spend...it's because they are trying to increase inflation in a serious manner. I don't hink they can do it for various reasons, but that's what they are trying to do.

It solves all of governments problems.

All entitlements get cheaper...housing recovers from the fall...government can spend far more than it takes in taxes...and the DEBT becomes so very much cheaper as well.

Thing is, I don't think it's ever worked. Nobody has quite dialed in with that degree of perfection when it comes to printing money.

And, it's a very complex approach. You can't quite predict WHERE that printed money will end up. Consumers? Businesses and jobs? Commodities and Stocks? Perhaps even gold in Switzerland.

They should have read Mises and let the crash happen without any intervention whatsoever.

Thank you. Ron Paul is correct, and somebody has to say it. The end result in any case is impoverishment of the US taxpayer - it can look like inflation, it can look like recession, depending on how the federal government, including the "Republicans," want to play the "economic" statistics.

Look how many people even on FR fall for the arcane "economists" arguments about debt limits, inflation., recession, unemployment. It is all verbal smoke and mirrors, to the level of Nobel economists.

A nation either has enough honesty to back it's currency with real competitive global production (that production can be either workplace or natural resources); or it is phony to the root . And if it is phony to the root, the global wolves and hungry are going to eat it for lunch. How obvious is it that that is exactly what is happening to the US; and that the self aggrandizing political class wants to obscure every aspect it possibly can to maintain their position and ego?

The tragedy is that the US, geoconstitutionally, is in a great global position to circle the wagons and protect its taxpayers; it has arable land, water, fossil fuels, renewable energy resources, harbors, coasts; all while it could (and should) identify, isolate, and demote (or deport) the lazy arrogant government dependent extortionists.

There are immense sinister planet wide forces who do not want this to happen. It is deep. And it is why Barack Obama was funded across the planet. And that is exactly why Sarah Palin is impugned, she knows what is going on. So does Ron Paul.

So I guess this is just talk. We need more of it, after all that is what BO and his Media sycophants are all about.

Johnny Suntrade

29
posted on 07/19/2011 5:38:46 PM PDT
by jnsun
(The Left: the need to manipulate others because of nothing productive to offer.)

He would. There are seriously people on Ron Paul Forums who think that they can get enough Dems to crossover and vote Paul in the GOP primaries to win. Now, this isn’t possible, but some will try and he’ll get more votes from them than from conservative Republicans he has duped.

Ron Paul is the irrelevant one. Making a bunch of sole no votes is irrelevant if you have accomplished nothing. And, believe me, I would have joined him on many of his no votes. That doesn’t make it fit for him to be President. The point still stands that he has not stopped a single bill from passing Congress, nor has he advanced any legislation that would get government out of our lives. The only real legislative accomplishment I can name is his getting passed an extremely watered down audit bill attached to a piece of grotesque legislation that few Republicans voted for.

All he does is give an occasionally decent floor speech, but most of his speeches are still pieces of rambling nonsense that only his cult fans can understand. Most of the rest of us just go like “huh?”

My agenda is to change the mindset of people into praise of zero government activity rather than viewing “accomplishment” as admirable. That includes bills to prohibit abortion. That includes bills to increase military funding. Accomplishment is harmful.

Any bill that causes government expenditure for any cause, liberal or conservative, in an environment of debt, is harmful.

Ironic because Ron Paul was one of the three Republicans who refused to give up his earmarks last year.

True, he things everything should be an earmark and not at the discretion of Federal agencies but as long as the Federal Government is confiscating so much of his constituents money, he wants to get some of it back.

My main point is that he does beleive in a small Federal Government. Jim DeMint may want to cut spending, but he does not believe in a small Federal Government.

What we need is a radical President that will veto every bill the Congress sends up until significant concessions are agreed to by both parties. We need someone that will cut spending by a trillion a year.

Read a book that isn’t by Murray Rothbard for a change. People like you are positively dangerous. Yes, I mean it. Anarchists have been trying to infiltrate the conservative movement since Goldwater ‘64. GET OUT, AND STAY OUT!!!

If you want the United States to look like Somalia or be taken over by a foreign dictator, become an anarchist. If not, continue to support our Constitution and seek necessary reform to prevent the overbearing state from happening again. It will happen again, but it’s better to seek reform than go off searching for a radical libertarian utopia.

If I weren’t on my phone I could actually link you to an interesting article re: Somalia and anarcho capitalism success story. Nevertheless, most ACs want nothing to do with conservatism or politics in any form so honestly I can’t see legions of them trying to infiltrate. Myself, I am just a conservative growing more and more fed up with the whole racket — maybe it’s evolution. Who knows? The ideas certainly appeal to me.

I am very familiar with the bogus assertions of the foolish anarchists in relation to Somalia. I am one of the top 30 posters on RPF. Reading their screeds about Somalia reminds of the Michael Moores of the world who expound on the wonders of Cuban healthcare and how the USSR wasn’t all that bad. The fact of the matter is that Somalia is so bad that you cannot drive on the rural highways because you’re liable to have a violent militia demand a “toll” from you. Yeah, that’s real freedom right there.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.